| Welcome to Exit Mundi Forums. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The most effective goverment?; What is the best way to manage things? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 4 2006, 08:39 PM (1,408 Views) | |
| Comrade Jim | Oct 5 2006, 05:59 PM Post #16 |
|
The Apocalypse Itself
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
A benevolent dictatorship which allows freedom of speech etc would probably be the most effective but no dictatorship will stay benevolent so dictatorships should only be instituted during a dire crisis. As Churchill said "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. " No system is perfect and any that appears to be is far to simplistic to work in reality (communism for example). Anyone else playied Deus Ex? SPOILERS!! One of the endings is when a AI merged with the main character (to teach it right and wrong etc) takes control of the world as a benevolent dictator. As a computer it is incorruptable and will last forever and thus is the perfect benevolent dictator and the "most perfect" form of government. |
![]() http://www.counterorder.com/nihilism.html http://www.resnet.trinity.edu/ddamon/hiero...exicon_menu.htm http://www.dcpoliticalreport.com/PartyLink.htm http://ninjagrizzlybear.azurenight.com/fightclub.htm | |
![]() |
|
| Necronomicon | Oct 5 2006, 06:13 PM Post #17 |
![]()
omar comin' yo
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Karl Marx wrote that there would have to be a 'new man' in order for communism to work, humble and just. This hypothetical new man never materialized, and so every attempt (honest or otherwise) at creating a truly communist state has failed. |
| omar yo. omar comin | |
![]() |
|
| Duncan | Oct 6 2006, 02:39 AM Post #18 |
|
Crazy Doctor's Apprentice
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Robert A. Heinlein has summed up my view on government better than I ever could:
|
![]() |
|
| Bigfoot | Oct 6 2006, 08:33 PM Post #19 |
|
The least shitty of the shittiest.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Meh |
| |
![]() |
|
| pie is delicious | Oct 8 2006, 04:32 PM Post #20 |
![]()
Earth Ending Impacter
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Make yourself dictator but let the people think they have a voice in things by giving them the right to vote (though you burn the ballots). Another helpful hint for keeping other world powers from butting in and "preserving human rights" is to set up a few model cities populated by your secret police who spend three weeks out of every year keeping it looking like a utopia. The next step is to make the outside world unappealing, this is done quite simply by either saying that your new country was the only one to surviev a catastrophic nuclear war and everywhere else is horrificaly radioactive or that everywhere else is a dictatorship that abuses power and human rights (remember your people think they are in a democracy). Also, to keep order disperse your secret police amoong the populace to catch revolutionaries at it. Maybe not the best government but definatly the best government for YOU! |
![]() |
|
| Tech Junkie | Oct 8 2006, 09:34 PM Post #21 |
![]()
Styx Ferryman
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
How about an absence of government or a direct democracy (Worked pretty well for Athens)? If you're looking at what sort of government is the most efficient at mass production without reguard for the preferences of its populace: Fascism Most Organized: Militocracy Most receptive to the people's concerns: Democracy, Republic, Benevolent Dictatorship Least Beurecracy: Any Dictatorship, Anarchism Most receptive to the concerns of the individual: Certain forms of Anarchism |
| May the blessing of Our Lady of the Workshop be upon you. | |
![]() |
|
| 严加华 | Oct 8 2006, 10:57 PM Post #22 |
|
Magister Ludicrous
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Athens had direct democracy for citizens only. The vast bulk of population -- slaves -- had no rights whatsoever, really. |
LC Sez:
| |
![]() |
|
| piercehawkeye45 | Oct 8 2006, 11:09 PM Post #23 |
|
Franklin Pierce
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Direct democracies would work well for city-states because of the lower population. We have problem getting a presidential election to go smoothly in America, imagine what it would be like if we had a national election every time we had to make a descion. |
|
Dropped the atomic bomb let them know that it's real Speak soft with a big stick do what I say or be killed I'm America! I have found the enemy and he is us. | |
![]() |
|
| Tom Joad | Oct 9 2006, 01:38 AM Post #24 |
|
Gap tooth so my dick's got to fit.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
We could harness the immense power of the internets. I do like the idea of direct democracy. |
| |
![]() |
|
| piercehawkeye45 | Oct 9 2006, 01:49 AM Post #25 |
|
Franklin Pierce
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I do too. But only if I'm the only one voting. |
|
Dropped the atomic bomb let them know that it's real Speak soft with a big stick do what I say or be killed I'm America! I have found the enemy and he is us. | |
![]() |
|
| Kalkin | Oct 9 2006, 09:25 AM Post #26 |
|
Disgraced Dictator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Direct democracy is the dictatorship of the best fast talker. Like I said before: The best form of government is always benevolent dictatorship. Of course a human as a dictator is a bad idea, since he becomes corrupted. I think a person could become a benevolent ruler and remain uncorrupted, if he became something else than a human. Notify: I don't mean genetics here. I think being a human includes also cultural aspects that are the main cause of the problems in human society. If we could replace those cultural elements with something that works better, we might get a benevolent and uncorrupt ruler. See the afterlife thread for my ideas on getting a clearer mind free of illusions. |
![]() |
|
| Falcon | Oct 9 2006, 12:38 PM Post #27 |
|
Apocalyptic Usher
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm a believer in the old fashion Constitutional Republic. You need a Constitution that cannot be easily changed except by a super majority working for a long period of time to establish solid predictible boundaries on government power that respect the liberties of the people. Then you have the people elect Representatives, perhaps all directly, or perhaps some indirectly (like the state legislatures used to elect senators) to legislate within the boundaries of the Constitution according, roughly, to the will of the majority of the moment. In this way the rights of the minorty can be secured, the government is made up of interested and hopefully more professional leaders, and the will of the majority sets the tone for the country's instant management. |
![]() |
|
| Kalkin | Oct 9 2006, 01:03 PM Post #28 |
|
Disgraced Dictator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Falcon wrote:
In case you haven't noticed that kind of change is precisely what the Bush faction is doing as we speak. Furthermore the republican party has been engaged in this sort of groundwork for over two decades. They lured the democratic party into this cementing secured support areas thingy where there are only a few contested states in every election, while most states always side with one party. Since the republicans have more secured states, they always have the advantage. Then came the Bush faction that took advantage of this process and established their regime. Did I mention yet that the companies that maintain, fix and tune the voting machines are owned by members of the republican party? The bottom line is: Corrupting a democracy might be a task that requires more patience than corrupting a dictator, but once it's corrupt it stays that way until there is a revolution or it gets conquered. A corrupt dictator on the other hand can be taken care of by one bullet. The problem is that if you have a group of couple hundred people there are corrupt people around and if they got to act within a faceless organization like congress they can maintain their position and unless they get caught they have an advantage at every election. In the meantime some of the other representatives get replaced by more corrupt people, who also stay long in politics due to their advantage over honest people. The cycle continues with corrupt people gaining ground at every election. Then they form an organization within organization to protect their own asses from one another and from the risk of getting punished in case they get caught. Once the corrupted people are the majority the next logical step is to start changing the constitution to allow them to enhance their activities and diminish risks. On my opinion this is exactly what has happened during the last two decades and this progress has culminated to the era of the Bush faction. The one to come after him will finish the job and turn USA into a complete banana republic. |
![]() |
|
| pie is delicious | Oct 9 2006, 11:07 PM Post #29 |
![]()
Earth Ending Impacter
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
How about this, You have a dictator and a board much like out congress. The dictator rules but the board (which represents all groups of people) has a few buttons. When the dictator does something they don't like they press a button and give him an electric shock. If he does something they really don't like they give him a stronger jolt. Finaly if he does something inexcusable they give him a strong enough jolt to kill him. They can't remove him from power, they have to kill him. This keeps them from removing from power someone because they don't like his policy. There also has to be a majority vote to give him a jolt so he isn't shocked for every decision. |
![]() |
|
| Flamingo | Oct 9 2006, 11:20 PM Post #30 |
|
Penis goes in here
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It sounds like the "congress" is the real dictator. What's the whole point about him if they make the rules? I'm not much into governments, so i might sound stupid in this thread. |
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and Religion · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z2.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)








12:34 AM Jul 11